alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
<TABLE> <S> <C>

<PAGE>
<ARTICLE> 5
<LEGEND>
THIS SCHEDULE CONTAINS SUMMARY FINANCIAL INFORMATION EXTRACTED FROM NEOMAGIC
CORPORATION'S CONSOLIDATED CONDENSED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE NINE MONTH
PERIOD ENDING OCTOBER 31, 1999 AND IS QUALIFIED IN ITS ENTIRETY BY REFERENCE TO
SUCH FINANCIAL STATEMENTS.
</LEGEND>
<MULTIPLIER> 1,000

<S>                             <C>
<PERIOD-TYPE>                   9-MOS
<FISCAL-YEAR-END>                          JAN-30-2000
<PERIOD-START>                             FEB-01-1999
<PERIOD-END>                               OCT-31-1999
<CASH>                                          52,239
<SECURITIES>                                    36,255
<RECEIVABLES>                                   17,570
<ALLOWANCES>                                         0
<INVENTORY>                                     24,126
<CURRENT-ASSETS>                               133,852
<PP&E>                                          21,232
<DEPRECIATION>                                  10,406
<TOTAL-ASSETS>                                 152,986
<CURRENT-LIABILITIES>                           37,818
<BONDS>                                              0
<PREFERRED-MANDATORY>                                0
<PREFERRED>                                          0
<COMMON>                                            25
<OTHER-SE>                                     115,143
<TOTAL-LIABILITY-AND-EQUITY>                   152,986
<SALES>                                        203,063
<TOTAL-REVENUES>                               203,063
<CGS>                                          139,399
<TOTAL-COSTS>                                  139,399
<OTHER-EXPENSES>                                49,364<F1>
<LOSS-PROVISION>                                     0
<INTEREST-EXPENSE>                                 667
<INCOME-PRETAX>                                 16,273
<INCOME-TAX>                                     6,382
<INCOME-CONTINUING>                              9,891
<DISCONTINUED>                                       0
<EXTRAORDINARY>                                      0
<CHANGES>                                            0
<NET-INCOME>                                     9,891
<EPS-BASIC>                                       0.40
<EPS-DILUTED>                                     0.38
<FN>
<F1>INCLUDES ONE-TIME CHARGE OF $5.3 MILLION FOR IN-PROCESS RESEARCH AND
DEVELOPMENT.
</FN>


</TABLE>
Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO
SECTION 302(a) OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I,
Herbert L. VanHook, certify that:



|Date: July 20, 2004                                        | 
|---------------------------------------------------------- | 
|/s/HERBERT L. VANHOOKPresident and Chief Operating Officer | 

---



Exhibit 31.1

CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO  SECTION 302(a) OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002

I,
John W. Riley, certify that:



Date:
July 20, 2004

/s/JOHN W. RILEYVice President and Chief Financial Officer


---



QuickLinks
# C_2020191EN.01000201.xml

| 8.6.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 191/2 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

8.6.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 191/2

---

Request for a preliminary ruling from the Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyjny we Wrocławiu (Poland) lodged on 23 December 2019 — Grupa Warzywna Sp. z o.o. v Dyrektor Izby Administracji Skarbowej we Wrocławiu

(Case C-935/19)

(2020/C 191/02)

Language of the case: Polish

Referring court

Wojewódzki Sąd Administracyjny we Wrocławiu

Parties to the main proceedings

Applicant: Grupa Warzywna Sp. z o.o.

Defendant: Dyrektor Izby Administracji Skarbowej we Wrocławiu

Question referred

Is an additional tax liability such as that provided for in Article 112b(2) of the Law on VAT compatible with the provisions of Council Directive 2006/112/EC of 28 November 2006 on the common system of value added tax (1) (in particular Articles 2, 250 and 273 thereof), Article 4(3) of the Treaty on European Union, Article 325 TFEU and the principle of proportionality?

---

(1)  OJ 2006 L 347, p. 1.

---
##### 



EXHIBIT 31.1 CERTIFICATION ACCOMPANYING PERIODIC REPORT
PURSUANT TO SECTION 302 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 I, David G. Fiore certify that: 1. I have reviewed this
annual report on Form 10-K/A of American Achievement
Corporation; 2. Based on my knowledge, this annual report does not contain any untrue
statement of a material fact or omit to state a material fact necessary to make
the statements made, in light of the circumstances under which such statements
were made, not misleading with respect to the period covered by this annual
report; 3. Based on my knowledge, the financial statements, and other financial
information included in this annual report, fairly present in all material
respects the financial condition, results of operations and cash flows of the
registrant as of, and for, the periods presented in this annual report; 4. The registrants other certifying officer and I are responsible for
establishing and maintaining disclosure controls and procedures (as defined in
Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(e) and 15d-15(e)) and internal control over financial
reporting (as defined in Exchange Act Rules 13a-15(f) and 15d-15(f)) for the
registrant and have; a) designed such disclosure controls and procedures, or caused such disclosure
controls and procedures to be designed under our supervision, to ensure that
material information relating to the registrant, including its consolidated
subsidiaries, is made known to us by others within those entities, particularly
during the period in which this annual report is being prepared; b) evaluated the effectiveness of the registrants disclosure controls and
presented in this annual report our conclusions about the effectiveness of the
disclosure controls and procedures, as of the end of the period covered by this
reports based on such evaluation; and c) disclosed in this report any change in the registrants internal control
over financial reporting that occurred during the registrants most recent
fiscal quarter (the registrants fourth fiscal quarter in the case of an annual
report) that has materially affected, or is reasonably likely to materially
affect, the registrants internal control over financial reporting; 5. The registrants other certifying officer and I have disclosed, based on our
most recent evaluation of internal control over financial reporting, to the
registrants auditors and the audit committee of registrants board of
directors (or persons performing the equivalent functions): a) all significant deficiencies and material weaknesses in the design or
operation of internal control over financial reporting which are reasonably
likely to adversely affect the registrants ability to record, process,
summarize and report financial information; and b) any fraud, whether or not material, that involves management or other
employees who have a significant role in the registrants internal control over
financial reporting. Date:
August 5, 2005 /s/ DAVID G. FIOREName: David G. FioreTitle: President and Chief Executive Officer
Exhibit 32.3



THANKSGIVING COFFEE COMPANY, INC.



CERTIFICATION PURSUANT TO

18 U.S.C. SECTION
1350,

AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO

SECTION 906 OF THE SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002



In connection with the
Annual Report of Thanksgiving Coffee Company, Inc. (the Company) on Form 10-KSB/A for the year ended December 31, 2004 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, the
undersigned Chief Financial Officer of the Company hereby certify, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as adopted pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge:



| | (i) | The Report fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934; and
| | --- | ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



| | (ii) | The information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the Company for the periods presented
therein.
| | ---- | --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------



/s/Sam KraynekChief Financial Officer
### IN THE UNI TED STAT ES COURT OFAPPEALS FOR THE FIF TH CIRCU IT

No. 11-10955 Summary Calendar

PEDRO OSEQUERA MORALES, Petitioner-Appellant

v. REBECCA TAMEZ, Respondent-Appellee

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:11-CV-57

Before KING, JOLLY, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * P e dr o O s e qu e r a M o rales, federal prisoner # 25327-018 , a p p e al s th e di s trict court’s dismissal of his 28 U.S.C. § 22 4 1 petition for lack of jurisdiction. O s equera Morales argues that he is actually innocent of the offense of conviction. He contends that he pleaded guilty to an i n d i c t m e nt that charged him with a violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(b)(1)(D), which provides a maximum sentence of five
years. Therefore, he argues that his 195-month sentence i s i n v a l i d because it exceeds the statutory maximum s e n t e n ce for the offense to which he pleaded U n i te d S ta te s C o u rt o f A p p ea l s

F i ft h C i rc u i t 

### F I L E D April 19 , 20 12 Lyle W . Cayce Clerk

Purs uant to 5 T H C IR

. R. 47.5 , the cour t has d ete rm inedt hat this op inion sho uld not * be publ ish ed and is not pr ece dent excep t unde r the lim ite d cir cum st ance s se t for th in 5 T H C IR

. R. 47.5 .4. Case: 11-10955 Document: 00511827895 Page: 1 Date Filed: 04/19/2012No. 11-10955

guilty. Osequera Morales contends that his claim falls within the savings clause of 28 U.S.C. § 2255 because it is based on Begay v. United States , 553 U.S. 137 (2008), which is retroactively applicable to his c a s e on collateral review. A petitioner ca n a ttack the validity of his conviction and sentence in a § 2241 petition only if he can meet the requirements of the savings clause of § 2 2 5 5 ( e )

. Kinder v. Purdy , 222 F.3d 209, 212 (5th Cir. 2000). The petition e r shoulders the burden of affirma t i v e ly showing that the remedy under § 2255 would be “inadequate or ineffective to test the legality of his detention.” § 2255(e); Reyes-R e q u ena v. United States , 243 F.3d 893, 901 (5th Cir. 2001). The Court held in Begay that a conviction for driving under the influence of alcohol was not a “violent felony” within the meaning of the residual clause of the Armed Career Criminal Act. Begay , 553 U.S. at 148. Thus, the holding in Begay has no relevance to Osequera Morales’s case. Additionally, Begay is not retroactively applicable to cases on collateral review. In re Bradford , 660 F.3d 226, 230-31 (5th Cir. 2011). Osequera Morales has not shown that his claim “is base d o n a

r e tro a c tiv ely applicable Supreme Court decision which establishes that [he] may have been convicted of a nonexistent offense.” See Reyes-Requena , 243 F.3d at 904. Thus, he has not shown that he i s entitled to proceed under the savings clause of § 2255. See § 2255(e); Reyes-Requena , 243 F.3d at 904. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. The Respondent’s motion for
summary affirmance is GRANTED, and its alternative motion for an extension of time in which to file a brief is DENIED.

2 Case: 11-10955 Document: 00511827895 Page: 2 Date Filed: 04/19/2012
GLD

- 285 NOT PRECEDENTIAL

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT

___________

No. 11

- 2862

___________

DAWN MARIE BAL L,

Appellant

v.

JUDGE NANCY BUTTS

____________________________________ On Appeal from the United States Di strict Court for the Middle District of Pennsylvania (D.C. Civ. No. 11

- cv

- 01068) District Judge: Honorable Yvette Kane

____________________________________
Submitted for Possible Dismissal Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B) or Summary Action Pur suant to Third Circuit LAR 27.4 and I.O.P. 10.6 September 8, 2011 Before: AMBRO, CHAGARES AND COWEN, Circuit Judges

(Opinion filed: September 21, 2011 )

_________

OPINION

_________

PER CURIAM

Dawn Ball, a Pennsylvania state prisoner, filed suit ag ainst Judge Nancy Butts of

the Lycoming County Court of Common Pleas. Ball alleges that, during a pending

criminal matter, Judge Butts ordered her transferred to SCI

- Muncy, where she alleges she

has been mistreated in the past and continues to be mistreat ed. Ball further alleges that2

Judge Butts ordered the transfer with “malicious intent,” and she seeks a transfer to

another prison and monetary damages. The District Court granted Ball leave to proceed

in forma pauperis (“IFP”), then dismissed her compla int pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §

1915(e)(2)(B)(iii) on the basis of judicial immunity. Ball appeals.

We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and our review of the District

Court’s application of law under § 1915(e)(2)(B) is plenary. See Allah v. S eiverling , 229

F.3d 220, 223 (3d Cir. 2000). Because we too have granted Ball leave to proceed IFP, we

must screen this appeal to determine whether it is frivolous. See 28 U.S.C. §

1915(e)(2)(B)(i). An appeal is frivolous if it “lacks an arguable basis either in law or in

fact.” Neitzke v. Williams , 490 U.S. 319, 325 (1989).

This appeal lacks any such basis. As the District Court adequately explained,

immunity extends even to judicial acts that are “done maliciously,” and Ball has alleged

nothing su ggesting that Judge Butts acted in the “clear absence of all jurisdiction.”

Gallas v. Supreme Court of Pa. , 211 F.3d 760, 769 (3d Cir. 2000) (citation and internal

quotation marks omitted). To the extent that Ball’s request for injunctive relief might no t

have been subject to dismissal under § 1915(e)(2)(B)(iii), it was subject to dismissal

under § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) because such relief is not available against “a judicial officer

for an act . . . taken in such officer’s judicial capacity” under these circ umstances. 42

U.S.C. § 1983. Finally, we are satisfied that any amendment of Ball’s complaint would

be futile. See Grayson v. Mayview State Hosp. , 293 F.3d 103, 111 (3d Cir. 2002). Thus,

we will dismiss this appeal. Ball’s motion for ap pointment of co unsel is denied.
# Fourth Court of Appeals **San Antonio, Texas**
MEMORANDUM OPINION
No. 04

- 14

- 00637

- CV IN RE David GOAD Original Mandamus Proceeding 1
PER CURIAM Sitting: Catherine Stone, Chief Justice Sandee Bryan Marion, Justice Luz Elena D. Chapa, Justice Delivered and Filed: September 17, 2014
MOTION DISMISSED FOR LACK OF JURISDICTION
On September 9 , 2014, David Goad filed a pro se motion seeking an immediate stay of proceeding s pending in Justice Court No. 4 , Guadalupe County, Texas, pursuant to Rule 52.10 of the Texas Rules of Appellate Procedure. Although the attachments to the motion suggest that a petition for writ of mandamus would also be filed , Goad has not filed a petitio n. 2 Rule 52.10 allows a relator to seek temporary relief “pending the court’s action” on a petition. T EX
. R. A PP
. P . 52.10. Implicit in Rule 52.10 is the necessity for a petition to be filed before this court can consider any

1 This proceeding arises out of Cause No . JSC4

- 4995, styled David Goad v. Jamie Osborne , pending in the Justice Court, Precinct 4 , Guadalupe County, Texas, the Honorable Todd Friesenhahn presiding. 2 It should be noted that this court does not have authority to issue a writ against a justice of the peace. See T EX
. G OV ’ T C ODE A NN . § 22.221(a)

- (b) (West 2004); see also In re Barrera , No. 04

- 14

- 00464

- CV, 2014 WL 3014696, at *1 (Tex. App.

— San Antonio July 2, 2014, orig. proceeding) (dismissing petition seeking mandamus relief against justice of the peace for lack of jurisdiction).04

- 14

- 00637

- CV grant of temporary relief. See id . At this time, there is no controversy before this court. Accordingly, Goad’s motion for immediate stay is dismissed for lack of jurisdiction.

PER CURIAM

- 2

-
<PAGE>
                                                                   EXHIBIT 10.11
March 7, 1998

Ronald A. Rittenmeyer

Ryder TRS, Inc.

1560 Broadway, Suite 1800

Denver, Colorado 80202

Re:  Employment Agreement

Dear Ron:

I have been advised that certain provisions of my employment agreement with the
Company dated December 18, 1997 may give rise to so-called "parachute payments"
under Section 280G of the Internal Revenue Code.

While my rights under my employment agreement are fully enforceable by me, I
hereby agree to waive all right and entitlement to the "Executive Severance" and
"Executive Stay-on Bonus" (collectively, the "Parachute Payments") to be
provided to me by the Company under the terms of my employment agreement.

My waiver of the Parachute Payments is subject to and conditioned on the
consummation of the transactions contemplated by the Agreement and Plan of
Merger dated as of March 4, 1998 by and among Ryder TRS, Inc., Questor Partners
Fund, L.P., Questor Side-By-Side Partners, L.P., Madison Dearborn Capital
Partners, L.P., BDG Corporation and Budget Group, Inc. (the "Merger Agreement").
If the Merger Agreement is terminated prior to the "Closing" (as defined in the
Merger Agreement) as provided in Section 10.1 of the Merger Agreement, my waiver
of the Parachute Payments shall be deemed rescinded, and the existing terms of
my employment agreement will continue to apply without regard to this waiver.
Except as otherwise provided herein, my waiver of the Parachute Payments shall
not affect any other benefits provided under my employment agreement.

Please acknowledge receipt and your agreement to the matters set forth in this
letter.

Very truly yours,

/s/ MICHAEL ZAWALSKI

Michael Zawalski


Accepted and Agreed to:

RYDER TRS, INC.

/s/ RONALD A. RITTENMEYER
____________________________
Ronald A. Rittenmeyer
**Exhibit 32.1**

 

**CertificationPursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350, as Adopted Pursuant to**

 

**Section 906of Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002**

 

 

I, Hal M. Krisbergh, theChief Executive Officer of WorldGate Communications, Inc., hereby certify,pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that the Form 10-Qof WorldGate Communications, Inc., for the quarterly period ended June 30,2005, which this certification accompanies, fully complies with requirements ofSection 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934(15 U.S.C. 78m or 78o(d)) and information contained in the June 30, 2005 Form 10-Qfairly presents, in all material respects, the financial condition and resultsof operations of WorldGate Communications, Inc.

 

A signed original of thiswritten statement required by Section 906 has been provided to WorldGateand will be retained by WorldGate and furnished to the Securities and ExchangeCommission or its staff upon request.

 

 
| Dated: August 15,  2005 |   | /s/ HAL M.  KRISBERGH    |
|------------------------------|--------|--------------------------|
|                         |   | Hal M. Krisbergh         |
|                         |   | Chief Executive  Officer |

 

----
<PAGE>

                                                                   EXHIBIT 23.2


                       CONSENT OF INDEPENDENT ACCOUNTANTS



We hereby consent to the incorporation by reference in the Registration
Statements on Form S-8 (Nos. 33-18966-99, 33-46724-99, 33-50270-99, 33-57675-99,
33-62394-99, 333-17407-99, 333-25857-99, 333-53912-99, and 333-80511-99) of
Noble Corporation of our report dated June 20, 2003, relating to the financial
statements and supplemental schedule, which appear in this Form 10-K/A.


PricewaterhouseCoopers LLP

Houston, Texas
June 27, 2003
# C_2020077EN.01006202.xml

| 9.3.2020 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 77/62 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

9.3.2020

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 77/62

---

Order of the General Court of 21 January 2020 — Bartolomé Alvarado and Grupo Preciados Place v EUIPO — Alpargatas (ALPARGATUS PASOS ARTESANALES)

(Case T-606/19) (1)

(2020/C 77/85)

Language of the case: Spanish

The President of the Fifth Chamber has ordered that the case be removed from the register.

---

(1)  OJ C 372, 4.11.2019.

---
EXHIBIT 32.1 CERTIFICATION
OF PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE OFFICER
PURSUANT TO 18 U.S.C. SS 1350,
AS ADOPTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 906 OF THE
SARBANES-OXLEY ACT OF 2002 In connection
with the quarterly report on Form 10-Q of Americare Health Scan, Inc. (the
Company) for the quarter ended June 30, 2008, as filed with the Securities
and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the Report), I, Dr. Joseph P.
DAngelo, President and Chief Executive Officer of the Company, certify,
pursuant to 18 U.S.C. 1350, as adopted pursuant to section 906 of the
Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that to the best of my knowledge: (1)
The Report
 fully complies with the requirements of section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of
 1934; and(2)
The
 information contained in the Report fairly presents, in all material
 respects, the financial condition and results of operations of the company.  Date:
October 29, 2008

/s/ Dr.
 Joseph P. DAngeloDr. Joseph
 P. DAngelo, President, ChiefExecutive
 OfficerOctober 29, 2008

/s/ Robert
 CanoRobert Cano,
 Chief Financial Officer
# C_2021252EN.01002302.xml

| 28.6.2021 | EN | Official Journal of the European Union | C 252/23 |
| --- | --- | --- | --- |

28.6.2021

EN

Official Journal of the European Union

C 252/23

---

Order of the General Court of 6 May 2021 — Groupe Canal + v Commission

(Case T-358/19) (1)

(Competition - Agreements, decisions and concerted practices - Television distribution - Decision making commitments binding - Withdrawal of the contested act - No need to adjudicate)

(2021/C 252/32)

Language of the case: French

Parties

Applicant: Groupe Canal + SA (Issy-les-Moulineaux, France) (represented by: P. Wilhelm, P. Gassenbach and O. de Juvigny, lawyers)

Defendant: European Commission (represented by: A. Dawes, C. Urraca Caviedes and L. Wildpanner, acting as Agents)

Re:

Application under Article 263 TFEU for annulment of the Commission Decision of 7 March 2019 relating to a proceeding under Article 101 TFEU and Article 53 of the EEA Agreement (Case AT.40023 — Cross-border access to pay-TV), making legally binding the commitments given by The Walt Disney Company, The Walt Disney Company Limited, Universal Studios International B.V., Universal Studios Limited and Comcast Corporation, CPT Holdings Inc., Colgems Productions Limited, Sony Corporation, Warner Bros. International Television Distribution Inc., Warner Media LLC, Sky UK Limited and Sky Limited.

Operative part of the order

| 1. | There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action. |
| --- | --- |

1.

There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the action.

| 2. | There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the application to intervene submitted by the French Republic. |
| --- | --- |

2.

There is no longer any need to adjudicate on the application to intervene submitted by the French Republic.

| 3. | The European Commission shall pay the costs, including those incurred by Groupe Canal +, with the exception of those relating to the application to intervene. |
| --- | --- |

3.

The European Commission shall pay the costs, including those incurred by Groupe Canal +, with the exception of those relating to the application to intervene.

| 4. | Groupe Canal +, the Commission and the French Republic shall each bear their own costs relating to the application to intervene. |
| --- | --- |

4.

Groupe Canal +, the Commission and the French Republic shall each bear their own costs relating to the application to intervene.

---

(1)  OJ C 270, 12.8.2019.

---